list_tables

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations are missing, so the description must disclose behavior. It does not mention pagination despite the presence of limit and page_token parameters, nor does it describe authentication needs or rate limits. The term 'optional filtering and sorting' is vague.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence that front-loads the main action. However, it could include a bit more context without becoming verbose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has 5 parameters, no schema descriptions, and an output schema that might explain return values, the description still lacks critical usage context like pagination behavior, sorting options, and filtering details. The agent would need to rely on parameter names alone.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should explain parameters. It mentions 'optional filtering and sorting' but does not map to specific parameters like table_types or sort_by. The meaning of limit, page_token, and sort_by is not clarified beyond the schema titles.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool lists all tables and views in a Coda doc, with optional filtering and sorting. It distinguishes from sibling tools that list other resources.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or limitations. The description only states what it does, not when it is appropriate.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.